Everybody understood that PM Theresa May stood in the
starting blocks to visit the American president Donald Trump, almost
immediately after his inauguration. There was hardly another option than to
become even better friends with the United States, if the UK did
not want to sink into economic oblivion.

Where the special relationship had traditionally been very
important to the eyes of the United Kingdom, it became paramount when the UK
decided to go its own way and leave the European Union.

The negotiation process with the EU – as a consequence
of the hard Brexit that Theresa May advocated – would be long and painful and
May was to expect hardly one inch of leeway during the whole process. And when
finished eventually, this would only be the beginning of an even longer and
more painful process of negotiating bilateral agreements with a huge number of
countries, that earlier had business relations with the EU as a whole.

This whole negotiating process might take a decade and will
be a long and winding road, with no guarantees in the end. It could even mean
that the UK could end up in a worse position than at the start of the
negotiations.

So even though PM May was not yet allowed to sign a
deal with the American president – the UK is still a member of the EU at this
moment – it would be a darn good feeling for her to leave the US with a letter
of intent and a few rockhard promises regarding trade agreements, in the best
interests of both countries.

Therefore standing at the stairs of the White House
would be a huge ego boost for Theresa May and it might even lend some street
credibility to Donald Trump, as he was off for a very shaky start in which he
offended almost everybody and their sister, except for his “friend” Vladimir
Vladimirovich Putin.

But May was soon to find out that her glorious pose at
the White House, holding hands with President Trump, was a Pyrrhic Victory and
would actually lead her away from the United Kingdom’s goal of wanting to be
taken serious as an economic powerhouse after the Brexit.

Hardly 24 hours after this glorious event, President Trump
by executive order deployed a ban against travellers from seven countries who
wanted to enter the USA: Iran, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Sudan, Somalia and Yemen. In
vernicular this ban was called the Muslim Ban. And this ban was valid for all
travellers coming from these countries and even for people born in one of these
countries, irrespective of the fact whether they carried a visa and a greencard
or not.

On top of that, this fate also struck people with a
double passport, who carried the second one from a country not present on this
list. It did not matter: they did not get in the country. Period.

And even though this ban was watered down slightly the
next day, when a justice of the Supreme Court stated that people with a valid Green
Card and a visa could not be refused access to the United States, the damage had
already been done for Trump and May. Especially, when thousands and thousands of
alienated and furious American citizens in cities with large airports scurried
to the terminals to protest and express their outrage about this Muslim Ban action.
An action that damaged thousands of travellers from one of these countries and
made them (temporary) prisoners of the terminal on the airport where they
landed, while others were not even allowed to enter the plane in their home
countries.

Perhaps the most surprising thing about this Muslim Ban
were the countries NOT on this list of banned countries: Saudi Arabia, Egypt
and the United Arab Emirates, among others.

Especially Saudi-Arabia was undoubtedly the biggest “perpetrator”
in sheer numbers of hijackers participating in the events during 9/11 and also
the United Arab Emirates has allegedly a far from clean sheet, with respect to
sponsoring of and participating in terrorism. Mudslingers stated that these voids
on the list were caused by the fact that Trump owned massive commercial real
estate participations in those countries and did not want to offend his hosts overthere.

For PM Theresa May the sh*t started to really hit the
fan, when British citizens found out that under the new circumstances the
British MP Nadhim Zahawi, who was born in Iraqi capital Baghdad, would
not be granted access to the United States anymore for the duration of this ban.
Her unemotional reaction to this ban – in order not to offend Trump directly after
her visit– outraged her countrymen even more.

And soon a new opportunity for British outrage will
occur, as PM May did not come empty-handed to her new, political ‘best friend
forever’ in the United States.

She carried an invitation for an official state visit of
President Trump to the United Kingdom. And reputedly this state visit contained
the ‘Full Monty’ in British hospitality, in the form of President Trump visiting
the Royal Palace, having a guided tour through London in the royal stagecoach
and playing golf on the royal golf links. And probably dozens of other
privileges, reserved for only the most important visitors to the country.

Of course President Donald Trump was more than willing
to visit the United Kingdom, but – “by the way, Prime Minister” – he was
adamantly against meeting Prince Charles.

The prince is not only a long-term environmentalist and
deeply involved in the battle against climate change, for which President Trump
does not give one rat’s behind, but he is also gifted with a very effective ‘royal
bluntness’ that bows for nobody and leaves no important subject untouched, as Chinese
president Xi Jinping can confirm first hand.

Meeting Queen Elisabeth and the Princes William and
Harry? No problem. But Charles? Forget it!

And now PM Theresa May comes into a perfect storm.

She must sweet-talk to a rude and unfriendly President,
who made a ‘historical event’ of his first week after the inauguration, by
desecrating more people than probably any president before him, including
Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan. A person whom she probably (?) dislikes and
who is hated by a substantial share of her own people for being the rude, angry
and xenophobe person that he is. And she does so, almost continuously standing
in the cross-fire of Scottish PM Nicola Sturgeon, who is absolutely not pleased
that Theresa May is going for the hard Brexit and who on top of that blames May
for her weak conduct against the Muslim Ban of late.

Besides that Theresa May must beg Donald Trump for
mercy, with respect to a future trade and partnership deal between the United
States and the United Kingdom, after she finished the painstaking negotiations
with the European Union upon the exit criteria.

And to make things even worse: Chancellor Angela Merkel
of Germany almost immediately took a firm and crystalclear stance against the
Muslim Ban by President Trump and was hailed and praised for that. Not only by
other Europeans, but even by May’s own countrymen, who saw in Merkel’s
appearance the backbone that Theresa May so dearly lacked in their eyes.

Of course it is solely to the British to decide whether
May indeed ‘kept the right ones out and let the wrong ones in’ or that they
still stand firmly behind her and the political choices she made.

However, few people will deny that a. President Trump
made an absolute disaster of his first week as president and that b. Theresa May
had just left him, when he deployed his despised and unfair Muslim Ban.

And that is something that
PM Theresa May has to live with for the rest of her political career.

Wednesday, 25 January 2017

Although the current period since 2008 is still called “The
Great Recession” and last century’s period during the interbellum is the only one
considered to be “The Great Depression”, there seem to be no really big differences
at all between both periods in time.

That is except for the emergence of the Twentieth
Century’s utterly ruthless leaders, like
German Reichskanzler Adolf Hitler, Japanese emperor Hirohito and the Soviet
Union’s supreme leader Josif Stalin. These undisputed “strong men” – in case of
Hirohito the invisible leaders behind him – threw their own countries and
others into extremely bloody (domestic) wars, with unimaginable bloodshed in
numerous countries and the ultimate deployment of the world’s most feared
weapon to this day, the atomic bomb.

It has not come this far yet and we all hope that it never
will, but the global signs should be enough to raise the stormball. So let’s
call the current period for what it is: a depression and a nasty one indeed.

Again there seems to be an extremely poisonous cocktail
of brutal nationalism, ubiquitous distrust and lack of international
cooperation between countries, protectionist tendencies and (sometimes) sheer
hatred against (religious) minorities inside and outside our own borders. A
mixture that is flavoured with a mounting desire among populations for strong
leaders who impose their will upon the domestic minorities, as well as the rest
of the world, instead of negotiating with them for their fair share of political
and economic privileges, trade and wealth.

While the normal streetlife in The Netherlands – and probably
other countries too – is still pretty “normal” and people are mostly friendly,
empathic and polite against one another, spending a few hours on Twitter and
other social media is enough to see how the situation is deteriorating rapidly
in the social interactions. Many people are angry..., furious..., even outraged...
and almost everyone of those angry people has become it, coming from his own personal stance
and worldview.

There is no understanding for each other’s position and
background anymore and people are simply disqualified, in case they don’t
belong to the winning group at their home turf. Diplomacy is at best performed
with the megaphone of shouting and usage of CAPITALS in every written statement.
“Nuances and shades of grey are soft and
we are not soft on softness anymore. We are soft on nothing and no-one. Black &
white, aka good & bad, are the colours of choice!”.

And please don’t think that the newly elected American
president Donald Trump is the only one, who administers his narrow world vision
by megaphone and CAPITALS.

No more cautious restraint for these parties anymore: theelectionvictoryof President
Donald Trump felt like their own victory, as if the victory in their national
elections cannot escape from them anymore. And the national polls of today seem
to work in their favour, in The Netherlands and France.

And the Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte seems to agree
with them too: in order to beat the populist Dutch Party for Freedom, Mark
Rutte deemed it necessary to put a one-page advertisement in all large daily
newpapers in The Netherlands, in which he asked everybody “who could not act
normal” to
“take a hike” away from The Netherlands.

Even though his cheap attempt towards hijacking the
populist vote was met with scornful laughter and sheer amazement from the
opposition, it is a tell-tale signal how low the political situation has sunk
in The Netherlands, that the Prime Minister must turn to such draconic measures.

Suffice it to mention the situation in Russia
and the Ukraine, but also in Hungary
and Poland, or
China and the
Philippinesand the view emerges of a world that tries to fight its
depression with a display of sheer aggression against other countries and domestic
/ foreign population groups (i.e. refugees), with the United States agitator-in-chief
Donald Trump as the latest (and perhaps most dangerous) populist star in the
galaxy.

Suddenly trade wars loom between the United States and
about every other industrialized country and political block in the world: about
rejected treaties and trade agreements, newly imposed trade barriers, import
levies and mandatory production lines in the United States for foreign brands,
who want to maintain their business in the US.

But there is also acrimony between the new US
government and environmentalists about strongly polluting oil pipelines or between
the United States and China about a few small islands in the South Chinese sea
and the natural wealth that these islands possess.

Not even to mention the current situation between the
US, Europe and Ukraine and Russia, coming from a decade of mounting tensions in
Europe. Or the Arab Spring, which is rather akin to an Arab Winter.

It is as the famous sage Frances Coppola states on Twitter:
“Trade wars have a tendency to become real
wars”. And that is a scary, yet not very implausible concept.

In
the noble game of poker it is not paramount that someone wins with a good hand.

But
how he prevents himself from losing while being dealt with a really bad hand...

Ernst
Labruyère - 21 januari 2017

“Alea
iacta est – the die is cast” as Gaius Julius Caesar is
believed to have said in 49 BC. Donald Trump IS now the 45th president of the
United States and WILL decide the future policy of the most important partner
that the EU has. And when his maiden speech as president is a text book example
for his policy in the coming years, the EU might be in for a very wild ride.

The
call for an assertive Europe has been sounding louder and louder during the
last couple of weeks. Reality is, however, that the European Union is hardly
capable of fiercely rebutting Donald Trump’s statements. The new POTUS knows
the weakness of its European interlocutors.

The
European dependence of the US is simply too big – especially with regards to
European strategic security – and even though the European consumer market is
much bigger than the American domestic market: when the United States sneeze,
the European Union almost immediately catch a cold! The EU could take Trump’s
words to heart and do something about its own incapability. Yet, reality bites
and the stakes are high that the EU is in worse shape next year than now
already is the case.

This is an extraordinarily straightforward editorial
from this (mostly) liberal-conservative newspaper and an extremely worthy one
for thorough consideration. Where the interests of the European continent lay traditionally
in the relation with the United States, this might come to a sudden end with
the election of “elephant in the china shop” Donald Trump, who left little
doubt about the direction of his policy: “America
first... and second... and third”.

‘America
first, America first.’ Donald Trump stated it twice, on purpose, during his
historical inauguration speech. He did not even have to raise his voice to let
the populistic message sink in easily. With Trump at the helm, the military and
economic powerhouse seemingly wants to draw back behind its own borders.

The
businessman painted the USA as a brutally robbed nation, helplessly whirling in
a bloodbath.’We must protect our borders against the devastation coming from
other countries, who make our products, steal our companies and destroy our
jobs. Protection will lead to great wealth and power”. Every decision regarding
trade, taxes, immigration and foreign affairs will come to the benefit of
American workers and families, is promised by Trump.

The
70 year-old New Yorker established America as a loser on all fronts. “Many
dozens of years we enriched the foreign industry, at the expense of the
American industry. We enriched other countries, while the wealth, the power and
the confidence of our country disappeared behind the horizon. The wealth of our
middle classes is robbed and redivided all over the world”

At least there is not much opaqueness anymore whether
President Donald Trump would be akin to Republican candidate Donald Trump in
his presidential statements or that he would lower his tone of voice. Trump has
entered the job like a raging bull with his horns forward, threatening to pierce
and squeeze anybody standing in his way; beginning with the (mostly extremely docile)
American press.

This caused a shock among the European leaders, who all
hoped that President Trump would be a soft-focused version of his “Republican candidate
appearance” during the whole election time. Still an elephant, but one with
soft, fluffy socks on. No, Trump isn’t cuddly and he probably won’t ever be either.

While – since the start of the financial crisis in 2008
– the European Union could get away with acting like “28
(now 27) frogs in a wheelbarrow” without too much irreversible
political damage, it seems that playtime is now over in world politics.

And so the European Union, represented by “Frogwrangler in chief” Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany –
undoubtedly the unelected leader of the European Union and by far the most
influentional European politician – finds itself back in an high-stakes poker
game, playing at a table with “Vicious Vladimir” Putin, Xi “the Sfinx” Jinping
and Donald “the Trumpinator” Trump. And during the last thirty-odd years the stakes have probably never been higher...

“Vicious Vladimir”, the Russian chessplayer, has the
winning strategy and the bluff, as he showed in the Ukraine, Syria and Turkey as
well as in his interference with the American elections; “Xi the Sfinx” has the
patience, inconspicuousness and determination of the leader of an empire with a
horizon of centuries, instead of days.

And “the Trumpinator”? He carries all the weapons and uses
blunt force while playing to make his point.

Current second rate players like Geert Wilders (PVV),
Marine le Pen (FN) and Frauke Petry (AfD) – who are not yet very significant – wait
for their opportunity to appear in the limelight, to stir things up even more for
the European Union. They all want to hijack the cash at the table and probably want
to hand it out to their fellows and textbook examples Trump and Putin, who they
consider to be determined heroes, in contrary to the cautious and reluctant
European leaders they hate so much.

At this table is player Theresa “May or May Not” really
the dark horse, whose ways are yet unpredictable. At this moment, Theresa May’s
role is therefore perhaps the most interesting one.

Will she declare Donald Trump her unconditional love
and chew through his rudeness and undisguised, protectionist nationalism, in
order to cherish and maintain the special relation between the United States
and the United Kingdom? Or will she remind herself that there is so much more that
she shares with the current European Union than with the Republican-governed,
sometimes really erratic and deeply religious United States, with their political
bluntness and their disdain for real problems on earth, like the mounting
fossile pollution, the expanding droughts and the soaring number of other climate-related
incidents.

Even though the latter would make more sense, it seems
not unlogic when she chooses to love the US unconditionally: at every price.
The price for herself losing this high-stakes pokergame would be that the
United Kingdom would sink into economic oblivion, as a consequence of disdain and
negligence by both the European Union and the United States. This would
probably lead it into the willing arms of China, in order to act as an unresisting
bridgehead to Europe.

One thing is certain: Europe must get its act together
and must do so quickly. It must improve its pan-European defence apparatus –
inside, but also outside the NATO – and it must really invest in an
independent, political defence strategy, as they can’t automatically rely on
the goodwill and obvious benevolence of the United States of America anymore
(i.e. as if they could ever...). The times of the EU as a spineless follower of
US foreign policy should really be a thing of the past.

This also means that the EU must think about serious
economic countermeasures against brutal American protectionism, further abolishment
of important trade deals and mindless American climate policies that Trump
might establish in the coming months and years.

Trump must be made clear that corporate imperialism has
always been a two-way street during the last few centuries and that many
American companies – like Nike, Apple, Facebook, Google, Uber and AirBnB and to
a lesser degree General Motors and Ford – have reached near-monopolies at the
expense of local, European Asian and African companies and millions of people
all over the world.

And that Trump perhaps should not risk THEIR position
on the huge European single market... Besides that, were it not the
American companies themselves who massively outsourced their
production jobs to the low-wage countrieson their way to higher
profits and higher shareholder satisfaction?! No European or Asian leader
forced those companies to produce everything in China, Bangladesh or Mexico!
Really! If Donald Trump wants to blame somebody for that, please look to “the
man in the mirror” and his predessors!

China must be warned (or else...) that it must not take
its territorial aspirations too far in the South-Chinese seas “simply because
they can” and brutally force other countries out of their way, but the United
States must be warned too that the job of “policeman of the world” is not
obviously theirs anymore.

The trust between Europe, Asia, the Arab world, Africa at
one hand and the US at the other currently shows some serious dents, after too
many failed attempts in nation building of the last few decades; the list of
American-enforced political rubble in Asia, Africa and the Middle-East is
mounting and mounting, with Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Syria and Libya as the
most telling examples.

And Europe must make clear to Vladimir Putin that the
current European borders must be respected at all costs and that he must stop
his deployment of fuzzy intelligence tactics in Europe, but that Europe wants
to improve the relations between the EU and Russia in the immediate future [as
this would be a sensible thing to do – EL].
The same goes for the relations between the European Union and Turkey; inside
the NATO and as a partner of the EU with too many common interests to quarrel
about everything.

All in all, this sounds almost like a mission
impossible to which even Tom Cruise could eat his heart out. But it is a
mission that the European Union has to undertake in order to not become the
victim in this high-stakes pokergame and lose its credibility in the world.

As I said in the beginning statement of this article: In the noble game of poker it is not paramount
that someone wins with a good hand. But how he prevents himself from losing
while being dealt with a really bad hand...

It is obvious that Europe has the bad hand indeed, but
they nevertheless have to deal with it!

Last Friday, January 6th 2017, my lovely wife Olga and
I went to the United Kingdom, on a so-called minicruise.

This minicruise would bring us from IJmuiden (close to
Amsterdam in The Netherlands) to Newcastle-upon-Tyne in the United Kingdom; we
would sail to England on Friday to arrive there on Saturday morning, with
roughly five hours to spend on a short city trip, before we would leave again
at 4.30 PM GMT in order to return to Dutch solid ground this Sunday morning.

Where I jokingly stated that it would be our “EU Final Farewell
tour” to the United Kingdom – with a slight amount of pitiful sarcasm due to
the oncoming Brexit – the trip felt indeed as us coping with a substantial and
bitter loss, as in a loving relation gone terribly awry. To be honest, the UK
will always remain the beloved neighbour of The Netherlands and the economic
and political ties between both countries will probably remain strong after the
Brexit, so things will not change too dramatically between our countries.

Nevertheless, the intended Brexit in 2018-2019 – or
much, much later when Sir Ivan Rogers was right indeed – still feels like a very
sad divorce, in which we all hope that the partners can get along fine in the
future and will remain friends on behalf of the children.

But we are far from certain about that...

When looks do not deceive, this divorce between the UK
and the EU could be a nasty one. A divorce with reciprocal feelings of
bitterness and envy but also remorse about all involved parties not being able
to set the record straight in time to save the relation.

At the time that the British population spoke in its
referendum, it was already too late; the damage was done and the effects could
not be mitigated anymore. And also in this case – like with many other divorces
– there might be desperate fights between the involved parties for a “fair division
of the shared property”. In this case the fights will take place on behalf of
fair future agreements between the UK and the EU countries, regarding all kinds
of economic, cultural, political and financial terrains.

These negotiations must succeed eventually, as the current
agreements on free movement of people, goods and money must be continued in the
future in any which way. Probably this continuation of the current agreements will
happen in a (very) different way than anticipated by both parties and nothing about
the final outcome is certain yet; not even the amount of time that these
negotiations will take before enabling the actual Brexit, as this is all
uncharted terrain.

As a matter of fact, the negotiations to achieve the
desired results could be really, really nasty and long-lasting; especially now
that the UK have abolished their very seasoned and understanding diplomat Sir Ivan
Rogers – who was very well-established and enormously respected in EU affairs –
in favour of the also very seasoned, but much less experienced Sir Tim Barrow,
who is considered a rookie regarding EU affairs.

And at the same time all the European populist parties
are chuckling for joy, as they see the Brexit as the first domino to fall on
their way to political domination for the extreme rightwing and leftwing
parties, at the expense of the moderate liberal, conservative and
social-democrat parties.

All these thoughts were tumbling through my mind when
we were debarking in Port-of-Tyne for our short, but nevertheless impressive
trip to Newcastle-upon-Tyne. And where I first felt some slight anger about the
British ‘betrayal’ of our long-lasting and somewhat awkward friendship and
harmony in the European Union and even gloated about the presumed British mistake
– “in the future they will get a good economic and political lesson from the
consequences of this event” – these negative feelings were soon replaced with
feelings of observance and even admiration for the United Kingdom and for its
long and impressive history, as one of the guiding nations in the world.

From the first Roman settlements in the city, via the
medieval castle and other centuries-old monuments to the landmarks of the
industrial revolution, my wife and I enjoyed this trip to Newcastle to the
fullest.

What impressed me most about this city was the
versatility of its inhabitants; these people were not only the archetypical
pale, red- and brownhaired Britons with their freckles and sun-sensitive skin,
but also a melting pot of Chinese, Malaysian, Indian, Pakistani, Iranian, African
and Carribean people, in combination with continental Europeans from all
countries.

And this proved in fact the current anti-immigration
hype as being mainly pointless, as it is already impossible to return to a
situation that does not exist anymore since the Fifties of last century. All
these people with their different looks and different descents are all Britons-out-of-choice
and they are all there to stay, unless something really dramatically happens. And
what such a dramatical event is? God would only know!

What many of the aforementioned populist parties in the
European countries want, is seemingly a return to a kind of fairytale country from
the Fifties that never really existed: a Disney-esque version of the United
Kingdom, Germany or The Netherlands, with all shiny, happy
people holding hands and having fun. The Utopia of an all-white,
all-native and all-Christian population, with the angry outside world being harmless
and especially far, far away.

Olga and I had a 4 hour stroll from the Central Station
to the Newcastle University in the North and to Gateshead in the South of this fascinating
and wonderful, old city. We admired the old and modern bridges and architecture
of Newcastle and enjoyed the riverside view upon the old city and realized that
time and history never stand still, but are always in motion: sometimes very
quiet and at other times very turbulent and intrusive. This is simply the
nature of time.

Nevertheless, after this short, but wonderful trip I
can only hope that both the European Union and the United Kingdom come to their
senses regarding the Brexit and aim at a friendly and respectful divorce, that
is in the best interest of our mutual heritage.

I believe unfortunately that it is too late to save the
marriage between the EU and the UK at this point in time, as it was never a
very happy one and too much animosity and misunderstanding grew during our
years together. Therefore our trip to Newcastle was indeed our “EU Final
Farewell tour”.

But let’s celebrate life and peace together and let’s
not be too harsh upon each other. We are still neighbours and we still need
each other very much, albeit in a different way than before.

Enjoy the pictures:

Port of TynePictures made by and copyright of Ernst LabruyèreClick to enlarge

Port of TynePictures made by and copyright of Ernst LabruyèreClick to enlarge

Poundstretcher "austerity shop" in Newcastle-upon-TynePictures made by and copyright of Ernst LabruyèreClick to enlarge

Newcastle-upon-TynePictures made by and copyright of Ernst LabruyèreClick to enlarge

Thoughprovoking art in Newcastle-upon-TynePictures made by and copyright of Ernst LabruyèreClick to enlarge

Newcastle-upon-TynePictures made by and copyright of Ernst LabruyèreClick to enlarge

Newcastle-upon-TynePictures made by and copyright of Ernst LabruyèreClick to enlarge

Newcastle-upon-TynePictures made by and copyright of Ernst LabruyèreClick to enlarge

Newcastle-upon-TynePictures made by and copyright of Ernst LabruyèreClick to enlarge

Stunning architecture of this Gateshead buildingPictures made by and copyright of Ernst LabruyèreClick to enlarge

WW I memorial bench in GatesheadPictures made by and copyright of Ernst LabruyèreClick to enlarge

Newcastle-upon-TynePictures made by and copyright of Ernst LabruyèreClick to enlarge

Newcastle-upon-TynePictures made by and copyright of Ernst LabruyèreClick to enlarge

"View through a bridge"Pictures made by and copyright of Ernst LabruyèreClick to enlarge

Newcastle-upon-TynePictures made by and copyright of Ernst LabruyèreClick to enlarge

Newcastle-upon-TynePictures made by and copyright of Ernst LabruyèreClick to enlarge

"View through a bridge"Pictures made by and copyright of Ernst LabruyèreClick to enlarge

Photo

Totaal aantal pageviews

Gold price

About me

Hi, I am Ernst Labruyère. I live in The Netherlands with my wife Olga and my three children.
I blog on the Dutch, European and worldwide economies.
I try to bring you the interesting newsfacts and insights.
Besides doing photography and playing my electric guitar, I'd like to drive to my work with my racing bicycle. Saving the environment and getting rid of some pounds. I hope you enjoy this blog. Please let me know: @orbeaernie on twitter or ealabruyere@gmail.com